Iran: a Chronology of Disinformation

By GARY LEUPP

The disinformation campaign eschews logic, gambling that fear alone will produce popular support. It anticipates the eventual discovery of its lies and charades, but calculates that the attainment of its heroic ends will make any embarrassment worth the effort. So what if following the nuking of Iran, after the rubble's cleared, we discover that Iran had no military nuclear program? Maybe there will be no evidence of anything at all left anyway. Maybe that's the radiant beauty of the plan.

Don't expect the neocons urging the Iran attack to apologize after the event, not matter how catastrophic the consequences. Consider Douglas Feith's response to the report by the Pentagon's inspector general that his Office of Special Plans peddled allegations about Iraq "not supported by the available intelligence" in order to get the U.S. into a bloody war.
"All of that was wrong, wasn't it?" Feith was recently asked by Chris Wallace in the most neocon-friendly environment imaginable, Fox News studio.
"No, not at all," Feith responded. "There was substantial intelligence. . . . There was a lot of information out there."
A lot of information indeed. Lots of stuff to believe and fear. That's how it works, again and again, in the history of U.S. imperialism. From the imaginary Spanish sinking of the USS Maine to the Gulf of Tonkin Incident to Saddam Hussein's WMD to Iran's plans for genocide. Disinformation has a long proud history of working well when deployed by amoral, unscrupulous, maybe insane men holding state power. Will it work once more?

Full report @ Counterpunch

Neocons attack on Iran is a Six-Year Project

Larisa Alexandrovna
Raw Story

The escalation of war rhetoric against Iran from the Bush White House and the neocons is just the latest installment of a long-term plan for another preemptive war.

The escalation of US military planning on Iran is only the latest chess move in a six-year push within the Bush Administration to attack that country. While Iran was named a part of President George W. Bush's "axis of evil" in 2002, efforts to ignite a confrontation with Iran date back long before the post-9/11 war on terror.

Presently, the Administration is trumpeting claims that Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon than the CIA's own analysis shows and positing Iranian influence in Iraq's insurgency, but efforts to destabilize Iran have been conducted covertly for years, often using members of Congress or non-government actors in a way reminiscent of the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal.
For the full report go @ AlterNet

Attack on Iran would have disastrous consequences, warn 15 groups

A coalition of fifteen British groups urges new diplomatic push to avoid crisis in the Middle East.

Military action against Iran could have disastrous global consequences according to a new
report published Monday 5 February by a diverse group of organisations including Oxfam, the Foreign
Policy Centre, faith groups and others.

On the one year anniversary of Iran's referral to the Security Council, a new joint report by 15
organisations - including think tanks, aid agencies, religious groups and Trade Unions - warns
that, despite the seriousness of the situation, there is still 'time to talk'. This must be used to
avoid an escalation with potentially disastrous consequences.

According to the report, military action against Iran could:

-- Further jeopardise the prospects of peace taking root in the Middle East - Long standing
Iranian links to Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Shia
groups in Iraq, along with the presence of significant minority Shia populations in Saudi
Arabia, could lead to severe destabilisation throughout the Middle East.

-- Severely undermine hopes for stability in Iraq - Iran has several thousand intelligence
agents operating in the Shia region of Iraq and has been accused of arming Shia
insurgents. A decision to activate insurgent units could lead to a massive escalation in
violence.

-- Bolster the position of hard-liners and set back chances of reform within Iran - Recent
municipal elections suggest that the bellicose rhetoric of Ahmadinejad is beginning to
lose appeal. Over the winter there have been fuel shortages and inflation continues to
rise. Ahmadinejad's popularity is waning. Military strikes would unify Iranians, ignite
greater nationalist feeling and undermine the growing prospects of an internal shift in
power.

-- Cause significant civilian casualties

-- Push developing countries into greater poverty - If military action led to an increase in
oil prices. For example, a $10 increase in oil price could drop the GDPs of Sub-Saharan
African states by an average of 3% with serious implications for those already living in
poverty.

-- Damage UK, US and European economies - if oil prices rose to $100 per barrel this
could increase the risk of recession.

-- Threaten serious environmental contamination - Bombing could result in radioactive
contamination, oil slicks and oil well fires that could take years to deal with.

-- Increase the terror threat to the UK by fuelling resentment and bolstering extremists.
The Coalition includes: Amicus, Amos Trust, British Muslim Forum, Christian Solidarity
Worldwide, Foreign Policy Centre, GMB, International Physicians for the Prevention of
Nuclear War, Medact, Muslim Council of Britain, Muslim Parliament, Ockenden
International, Oxfam, Oxford Research Group, Pax Christi, PCS, People and Planet, Unison.

Read full report @ Crirsis Iran